Template talk:Metroids
Excuse me? Would you mind explaining why exactly my category system is unsuitable for this template? You have removed it twice now without providing a reason.--AdmiralSakai 15:03, November 7, 2010 (UTC) They are actually infused with Metroid DNA or are part Metroid. People like MB who are considered mothers of Metroids are not Metroids themselves. --[[User:RoyboyX|''R''oy''b''oy'']][[User talk:RoyboyX|''X]] 15:17, November 7, 2010 (UTC) Hence the classification "Metroid Hybrids". A liger is not the same thing as a lion. That also does not explain the placement of Project Metroid Warriors in with the artificial Metroids (as it is not itself a Metroid, but an experiment that produced them), the Fusion Suit (as it is a biomechanical device that is not actually a living thing), or vaccine Metroid, which is based around Metroid cells but is not actually a Metroid (is a Human blood sample a Human? I hope not.)--AdmiralSakai 15:33, November 7, 2010 (UTC) So...... is anybody going to tell me not to change this? Because (for the reasons I stated above) I am quite certain that my system is more intuitive than the current version, and will change it to that if nobody objects further.--AdmiralSakai 00:10, November 18, 2010 (UTC) Anything with Metroid cells qualify as a Metroid. The vaccine because it has the baby's cell structure. The Fusion Suit because it was infused with the vaccine. PMW because it is a genetically engineered population of Metroids, and the unfreezables have a seperate page because there have been other unfreezables besides PMW. --[[User:RoyboyX|''R''oy''b''oy'']][[User talk:RoyboyX|''X]] 13:11, November 18, 2010 (UTC) Anyone like what I just did on the template? Should it be done for others too? --[[User:RoyboyX|''R''oy''b''oy'']][[User talk:RoyboyX|''X]] 19:29, November 21, 2010 (UTC) What did you just do? And no, something with Metroid cells in it does not automatically become a Metroid. It has pieces of a Metroid in it. But I'm not even talking about removing the category from those articles. I am talking about making the template clearer by creating a category for the four different articles that are metroid-based technologies, but not themselves Metroids. They stay on the template, just in a different table slot. And I also dislike the name "Metroid Characters" because most of the things in there are not really characters in any sense of the word so much as Metroids with names. It is a one-word change to make things clearer, that again does not remove or add anything to or from the category, or even move things between categories on the template. Is it that terribly important that they be referred to as characters and not specific metroids?--AdmiralSakai 20:08, November 21, 2010 (UTC) I made it so instead of "Infant Metroid, Omega Metroid, Queen Metroid" etc. it says Infant, Omega, Queen. I'm probably going to undo it because it's sort of inefficient. --[[User:RoyboyX|''R''oy''b''oy'']][[User talk:RoyboyX|''X]] 20:14, November 21, 2010 (UTC) I like it, actually.--AdmiralSakai 20:43, November 21, 2010 (UTC) Ahem. I usually consider myself a very patient individual, but it has been three weeks without a response from you on this template layout, and I find myself wondering if you've simply stopped caring. If I don't hear from you by this time next week I will assume that is the case and make the changes I've outlined above, expecting them not to be reverted. I imagine I would be able to get away with simply altering the template now, but because I respect you and your opinions (even if we rarely agree), and because I understand you have a lot of other things to deal with at the moment, I'm giving you another opportunity to try and convince me to change that plan.--AdmiralSakai 23:42, December 12, 2010 (UTC) I'm sorry, I've just been very stupid lately, brainless, and I was just yelled at for preparing the destruction of the bestiary categories. Do your edit again and I'll look at it in a more optimistic way. --[[User:RoyboyX|''R''oy''b''oy''X]] (Talk • • UN) 23:55, December 12, 2010 (UTC) I'm stupid, I looked at it, and I like the idea after all. Leave me be to sulk about my stupidity and how I can't do anything right. --[[User:RoyboyX|R''oy''b''oy''X]] (Talk • • UN) 23:58, December 12, 2010 (UTC) Thank you for doing my edit for me. And I for one thought it was a good idea to remove the bestiary categories. I'll be sure to make it up to you at some point in the future.--AdmiralSakai 00:32, December 13, 2010 (UTC) I think this template is a little too long. Could we split it up into more templates? [[User:Hellkaiserryo12|Hell''Kaiserryo12]]ADMIN] (Talk• ) 20:35, February 26, 2011 (UTC) You always think templates are too long. --[[User:RoyboyX|''Р''oй''б''oй''X]] (Talk • • UN) 20:56, February 26, 2011 (UTC) I see no particular reason why it must be divided. ''"My name is [[User:AdmiralSakai|'AdmiralSakai']], and I approve this message." 20:58, February 26, 2011 (UTC) Royboy: Maybe because when I see that something can be made easier for readers to use, then I want improve them. Lumping everything together like this is a little overwhelming for a new reader. There are a lot of headings in this template, and there are a few which have a small amount of articles in them too. It looks messy. All I want to do is make it easier for people to use the template. What would be the negative aspects of making this template smaller? You wouldn't be able to see everyhting at once? We could link to like templates. For example if we made a Metroid anatomy template, we could link back to the main one in small print at the bottom. [[User:Hellkaiserryo12|''Hell''Kaiserryo12]]ADMIN] (Talk• ) 22:47, March 19, 2011 (UTC) :Actually, upon re-evalution, I don't think we should split it up. Just have less headers. [[User:Hellkaiserryo12|''Hell''Kaiserryo12]]ADMIN] (Talk• ) 22:48, March 19, 2011 (UTC)